Follow-Up Proposal - voting ended - (Tramtrack on highway)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Follow-Up Proposal - voting ended - (Tramtrack on highway)

Nikulainen, Jukka K
Follow-Up Proposal on the Tramtrack on highway proposal (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tramtrack_on_highway)

First of all, thank you to all who voted and/or commented on the proposal!

The vote ended in 20 votes cast in total, with 12 approving and 8 opposing votes. This gives an approval rating of 60%, so it is my understanding that the proposal cannot be approved without emendations.

Indeed, many approving votes added reservations about the tag values in the comments. Furthermore also many opposing votes commented positively about the idea of the tag, but opposed the proposal because of the specific proposed tag value.

A better tally of the votes would thus be:
4/20 votes unambiguously opposing.
8/20 votes approving of the idea, but opposing or apprehensive about the specific proposed tag values.
8/20 votes unambiguously approving.

Which gives 16/20 votes approving of the idea (possibly with emendations) and 4/20 opposing. Consequently the idea itself enjoys an 80% approval rating.

Based on the comments and discussion on the tagging mailing list, the main argument against the original proposal was a clash with the railway-tag semantics. Many people (including: Rainero, Vorpalblade77-kaart, Gallseife, and originally also Mateusz Konieczny) have suggested a sui generis tag of embedded_rails=tram and embedded_rails=railway for the purpose.

My follow-up proposal would be: create the new embedded_rails tag with values embedded_rails=tram and embedded_rails=railway and link this tag-description page to (at least) the bicycle and railway tag-description pages.

It seems to me superfluous to have a new vote on the embedded_rails tag itself. The main problem with the original proposal was considered to be the clash with already existing tag-namespace. The new sui generis tag takes care of this. Voting again on the specific values of such a sui generis tag seems--to me--to be pointless, since the only point of contention would be whether the tag is descriptive enough or whether it can accept the needed values. It seems to me obvious that the embedded_rails=tram and embedded_rails=railway succeed in both regards.

I hope such an approach is considered kosher. I'll abstain from creating the new page for at least a week now. Please comment if you see dire problems with my follow-up proposal! If no substantial new problems come up in the discussion, I'll proceed as outlined above (and finally try to take decent pictures of tramlines both on a highway and on a separate track here in Helsinki).

Sincerely,
Jukka Nikulainen (Tolstoi21)
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Follow-Up Proposal - voting ended - (Tramtrack on highway)

Paul Allen
On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 9:14 AM Nikulainen, Jukka K <[hidden email]> wrote:

It seems to me superfluous to have a new vote on the embedded_rails tag itself.

It seems to me that there are two possibilities here.

1) Your analysis is correct.  The new proposal would meet with universal acclaim and pass
unanimously.  In which case you have no reason to fear such a vote other than the relatively
small amount of work to implement the process.

2) Your new idea would not have universal approval and would fail.  In which case a vote IS
required to show that the community rejects your blithe assumption that there is no need
for a vote.

There is only one way to find out which possibility is true, and that is to have a vote.  Regardless
of the merits of your new proposal it needs a vote, if only to confirm its legitimacy.

Note that a cynical person would assume that your "we don't need a vote" argument was an
attempt to circumvent the fact that we do need a vote.  Even if your motives are entirely
innocent, they may not be seen as such.

I reject your proposal not to produce a new proposal.

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Follow-Up Proposal - voting ended - (Tramtrack on highway)

Nikulainen, Jukka K
In reply to this post by Nikulainen, Jukka K
Hello Paul, and thank you for your input!

You are indeed correct that my follow-up proposal would very radically cut corners and be, to say the least, unorthodox. I'm certainly sorry if it offended the sensibilities of anyone.

I can see now that it could be construed as malicious and you are certainly right that implementing a new vote on a new proposal would not be an excessive amount of work.

Indeed, doing a new proposal and a new vote seems the right thing to do, and I'll get to it soon!

Please let me explain the rationale my odd follow-up proposal, as a few lines in your response did catch my eye:

> 1) Your analysis is correct. The new proposal would meet with universal acclaim and pass unanimously.

I don't quite understand how you could possibly have reached the conclusion that I would expect "universal acclaim" or unanimity, from anything that I've written in the follow-up. It seems to me painstakingly obvious that neither would ensue, judging only from the opposing votes and critical comments on the original proposal.

Furthermore, responding to your second point, I was not aware that "universal acclaim" was required for a proposal to pass as you suggest. At least the proposal process wiki page seems to say otherwise. But of course I could just be moronically illiterate, in which case: mea maxima culpa!

I would also argue that my follow-up proposal isn't based on blitheness. Rather it is based on the sixteen approving votes on the original proposal and the quite acute and perceptive critical comments they contained and conveyed. Nor is expediency alone my motivation (though I must admit, it is a consideration too).

I, rather, worry whether enough people will be interested to vote again on a similar proposal only with changed tag-values. Many of the interesting critical comments and interested people in fact came forth only after voting had started and the proposal could no longer be changed. It would be a shame if the idea (which, again, _did_ garner support on the first round) would be lost in the absence of interest on a second proposal and vote. But maybe I just worry too much.

Sincerely,
Jukka Nikulainen (Tolstoi21)

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Follow-Up Proposal - voting ended - (Tramtrack on highway)

Jo-2
I look forward to a new vote and will vote in favour of what you're proposing now.

Polyglot

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 8:29 PM Nikulainen, Jukka K <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello Paul, and thank you for your input!

You are indeed correct that my follow-up proposal would very radically cut corners and be, to say the least, unorthodox. I'm certainly sorry if it offended the sensibilities of anyone.

I can see now that it could be construed as malicious and you are certainly right that implementing a new vote on a new proposal would not be an excessive amount of work.

Indeed, doing a new proposal and a new vote seems the right thing to do, and I'll get to it soon!

Please let me explain the rationale my odd follow-up proposal, as a few lines in your response did catch my eye:

> 1) Your analysis is correct. The new proposal would meet with universal acclaim and pass unanimously.

I don't quite understand how you could possibly have reached the conclusion that I would expect "universal acclaim" or unanimity, from anything that I've written in the follow-up. It seems to me painstakingly obvious that neither would ensue, judging only from the opposing votes and critical comments on the original proposal.

Furthermore, responding to your second point, I was not aware that "universal acclaim" was required for a proposal to pass as you suggest. At least the proposal process wiki page seems to say otherwise. But of course I could just be moronically illiterate, in which case: mea maxima culpa!

I would also argue that my follow-up proposal isn't based on blitheness. Rather it is based on the sixteen approving votes on the original proposal and the quite acute and perceptive critical comments they contained and conveyed. Nor is expediency alone my motivation (though I must admit, it is a consideration too).

I, rather, worry whether enough people will be interested to vote again on a similar proposal only with changed tag-values. Many of the interesting critical comments and interested people in fact came forth only after voting had started and the proposal could no longer be changed. It would be a shame if the idea (which, again, _did_ garner support on the first round) would be lost in the absence of interest on a second proposal and vote. But maybe I just worry too much.

Sincerely,
Jukka Nikulainen (Tolstoi21)

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Follow-Up Proposal - voting ended - (Tramtrack on highway)

Nikulainen, Jukka K
In reply to this post by Nikulainen, Jukka K
Dear all!

Sorry for the earlier outburst (especially to Paul) and sorry for my quite thoughtless follow-up proposal!

I do realize the importance of following the proper protocol, especially in a project the size of OSM.

I'll try to get the new proposal ready hopefully this week.

>I look forward to a new vote and will vote in favour of what you're proposing now.
>
>Polyglot

Thank you!

Sincerely,
Jukka (Tolstoi21)


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging